mxwsn
This essay by Neal Stephenson was first published in 1999. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Beginning..._Was_the_...

The analogy of OS as cars (Windows is a station wagon, Linux is a tank) is brought up in the recent Acquired episode on Microsoft, where Vista was a Dodge Viper but Windows 7 was a Toyota Camry, which is what users actually wanted.

ndsipa_pomu
One major advantage of the CLI is that instructions/fixes etc are very concise and can be easily communicated. If someone has a Linux system that needs a known fix, then it's trivial to send someone the commands to copy/paste into a terminal. However, if there's a known fix for a graphical program, then it suddenly becomes much harder to communicate - do you go for a textual instruction (e.g. click on the hamburger menu, then choose "preferences"...), or a series of screenshots along with some text?
kkfx
To be (re)read together with the Unix Haters Handbook https://web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf to realize that what we need is re-made LispM, Smalltalk workstations or the OS as a single application, framework opened down to the most low level part, in the user hands, fully end-user programmable, discoverable, and fully integrated. A 2D and even 3D/4D CLI as the UI, witch is the DocUIs with eventual 3D and video/multimedia elements.

As a conceptual framework http://augmentingcognition.com/assets/Kay1977.pdf

xg15
> Buyer: "But this dealership has mechanics on staff. If something goes wrong with my station wagon, I can take a day off work, bring it here, and pay them to work on it while I sit in the waiting room for hours, listening to elevator music."

Bullhorn: "But if you accept one of our free tanks we will send volunteers to your house to fix it for free while you sleep!"

Did Linux distros actually offer support at some point? (By what I assume would be some project contributor ssh-ing into your machine)

My impression was always the arguments were more like "Well yes, but we have this literal building full of technical manuals that describe every bolt and screw of your tank - and we can give you a copy of all of them for free! And think about it - after you have taken some modest effort to read and learn all of them by heart, you'll be able to fix and even modify your tank all on your own! No more dependence on crooked car dealers! And if you need help, we have monthly community meetups you can attend and talk with people just as tank-crazy as you are! (please only attend if you're sufficiently tank-crazy, and PLEASE only after you read the manuals)"

(This was decades ago, the situation has gotten significantly better today)

nonrandomstring
For if your browser isn't okay with the long lines;

wget -O - https://web.stanford.edu/class/cs81n/command.txt | nroff | less

yetihehe
My favourite part explaining how unix/linux users feel regarding windows: 'THE HOLE HAWG OF OPERATING SYSTEMS'.

This essay should be a mandatory reading for all CS students and anyone wanting to call himself hacker.

inciampati
I read this during my university graduation ceremonies. It was hidden in a fold in my robes. It was the most fitting thing I could have done, as I immediately changed my life direction and focused on exactly the ideas outlined in this work. My goal: move the world from the command line. I've almost managed to.
simonmysun
I just wrote a command line interface of LLMs in (almost) pure Bash[1]. I endorse the future of LLMs because of the points in this article. People talk to LLMs the same way we talk to CLI shells, and everything is plain text based (It's Unix philosophy! ). I should've read this earlier to get more ideas before writing the CLI client.

[1]: https://github.com/simonmysun/ell

larsrc
Does this win the HN prize for Most Often Reposted Article? It's been posted on average twice a year for 17 years: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
qubex
I’ve got this in soft-cover. I think I read it back before the turn of the millennium. As a BeOS aficionado I loved the reference to batmobiles.
danielovichdk
Yes. Cults are real. At the same time very telling. Some people really believe they are better because they have a different machine than someone else. And that shit runs deep.
almog
I still remember one of the quotes from The Metaphor Shear chapter, where he tried to explain how he felt after some of his files on his Mac got corrupted to such degree that he just couldn't recover: "It was sort of like watching the girl you've been in love with for ten years get killed in a car wreck, and then attending her autopsy, and learning that underneath the clothes and makeup she was just flesh and blood."
macleginn
Using plain $LANGUAGE to communicate with LLMs is an interesting contender, which is even easier for end users than GUIs and even less precise and is further removed from the underlying computations. In spirit, it is definitely a step in the same general direction, which makes a lot of formulations in this article sharply prescient.
bee_rider
> Yet now the company that Gates and Allen founded is selling operating systems like Gillette sells razor blades. New releases of operating systems are launched as if they were Hollywood blockbusters, with celebrity endorsements, talk show appearances, and world tours.

I was a kid at the time, but did many people actually buy windows? I know about the ad-thing where the cast of Friends or whatever bought windows 95, but as I recall even back then the OS just came with the device. The only exception was OSX, which was a “Big Deal,” even non-technical people downloaded it.

Anyway, it is funny to see this in retrospect. Nowadays, operating systems have become so commoditized that you can’t even make a business selling them.

I love Linux but his description is quite optimistic.

kaladin_1
Thanks for posting. A very interesting read. This is my first time seeing this well written piece. Written in a text file, sign of his distrust for software that mangle your ASCII :)
themadturk
It may be outdated, but it's still one of my favorite Stephenson texts. It's been a while since I read it, but the best part for me is his explanation of abstraction in graphical systems, which I think is still valuable today as we get further and further away from whatever the fundamental interface is between human and computer.
KingOfCoders
In the beginning was a switch.
jart
> It is commonly understood, even by technically unsophisticated computer users, that if you have a piece of software that works on your Macintosh, and you move it over onto a Windows machine, it will not run. That this would, in fact, be a laughable and idiotic mistake, like nailing horseshoes to the tires of a Buick.

Not anymore. https://justine.lol/ape.html

sharas-
My first 486DX PC had a "turbo" button. You press it - and it wasn't just a teletype anymore.
dang
Related:

In the Beginning was the Command Line (1999) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37314225 - Aug 2023 (2 comments)

In the Beginning Was the Command Line - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29373944 - Nov 2021 (4 comments)

In the Beginning was the Command Line (1999) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24998305 - Nov 2020 (64 comments)

In the beginning was the command line (1999) [pdf] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20684764 - Aug 2019 (50 comments)

In the Beginning Was the Command Line (1999) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16843739 - April 2018 (13 comments)

In the Beginning Was the Command Line (1999) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12469797 - Sept 2016 (54 comments)

In the beginning was the command line - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11385647 - March 2016 (1 comment)

In the Beginning was the Command Line, by Neal Stephenson - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=408226 - Dec 2008 (12 comments)

In the beginning was the command line by Neil Stephenson - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=95912 - Jan 2008 (5 comments)

In the Beginning Was the Command Line - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47566 - Aug 2007 (2 comments)

(Reposts are fine after a year or so; links to past threads are just to satisfy extra-curious readers. In the case of perennials like this one, it's good to have a new discussion every once in a while so newer user cohorts learn what the classics are.)

willguest
Shouldn't this be written in Latin?
zeruch
Such an underrated book.
ryandv
The section on "THE INTERFACE CULTURE" is critical to understand in today's digital media landscape. Disney's Animal Kingdom is to the written works of Lewis Carroll and J.M. Barrie as the GUI is to the command-line interface. The message of one medium is audiovisual spectacle and immersive experience; the other, cold intellectualism demanding participation from the reader to paint a picture in his mind's eye through the interpretation of raw text, words on a screen, or a piece of paper.

    But this is precisely the same as what is lost in the transition from the
    command-line interface to the GUI.

    Why are we rejecting explicit word-based interfaces, and embracing
    graphical or sensorial ones--a trend that accounts for the success of both
    Microsoft and Disney?

    But we have lost touch with those intellectuals, and with anything like
    intellectualism, even to the point of not reading books any more, though we
    are literate.
Elsewhere [0] I have called this concept "post-literacy," and this theme pervades much of Stephenson's work - highly technologically advanced societies outfitted with molecular assemblers and metaverses, populated by illiterate masses who mostly get by through the use of pictographs and hieroglyphic languages (emoji, anyone?). Literacy is for the monks who, cloistered away in their monasteries, still scribble ink scratchings on dead trees and ponder "useless" philosophical quandaries.

The structure of modern audiovisual media lends itself to the immediate application of implicit bias. On IRC, in the days of 56k before bandwidth and computer networks had developed to the point of being able to deliver low-latency, high definition audio and video, perhaps even for "real-time" videoconferencing, most of your interactions with others online was mediated through the written word. Nowhere here, unless some party chooses to disclose it, do race, gender, accent, physical appearance, or otherwise, enter into the picture and possibly cloud your judgment of who a person is - or, more importantly, the weight of their words, and whether or not they are correct, or at least insightful; consider Turing's "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" paper which first introduced what is now called the "Turing test," and how it was designed to be conducted purely over textual media as a written conversation, so as to avoid influencing through other channels the interrogator's judgment of who is the man, and who is the machine.

    The only real problem is that anyone who has no culture, other than this
    global monoculture, is completely screwed. Anyone who grows up watching TV,
    never sees any religion or philosophy, is raised in an atmosphere of moral
    relativism, learns about civics from watching bimbo eruptions on network TV
    news, and attends a university where postmodernists vie to outdo each other
    in demolishing traditional notions of truth and quality, is going to come
    out into the world as one pretty feckless human being.
Moreover, the confusion of symbols for reality, the precession of digitized, audiovisual content from a mere representation to more-than-real, digital hyperreality (since truth and God are all dead and everything is merely a consensual societal hallucination), leads people to mistake pixels on a screen for actual objects; narrative and spin for truth; influencers, videos, and YouTube personalities for actual people; or words from ChatGPT as real wisdom and insight - much in the same way that Searle's so-called "Chinese room" masquerades as an actual native speaker of Mandarin or Cantonese: "What we're really buying is a system of metaphors. And--much more important--what we're buying into is the underlying assumption that metaphors are a good way to deal with the world."

    So many ignorant people could be dangerous if they got pointed in the wrong
    direction, and so we've evolved a popular culture that is (a) almost
    unbelievably infectious and (b) neuters every person who gets infected by
    it, by rendering them unwilling to make judgments and incapable of taking
    stands.

    It simply is the case that we are way too busy, nowadays, to comprehend
    everything in detail.
The structure of modern short-form, upvote-driven media, lends itself to the production of short-form messages and takes with laughably small upper bounds on the amount of information they can contain. In a manner reminiscent of "you are what you eat," you think similarly to the forms of media you consume - and one who consumes primarily short-form media will produce short-form thoughts bereft of nuance and critical thinking, and additionally suffer from all the deficits in attention span we have heard of as the next braindead 10-second short or reel robs you of your concentration, and the next, and the next...

Beyond the infectious slot machine-like dopamine gratification of the pull-to-refresh and the infinite doomscroll, the downvote has become a frighteningly effective means of squashing heterodoxy and dissent; it is only those messages that are approved of and given assent to by the masses that become visible on the medium. Those who take a principled stand are immediately squashed down by the downvote mob, or worse, suffer from severe censure and invective at the hands of those zealous enforcers of orthodoxy. The downvote mechanism is reminiscent of the three "filters" Chomsky wrote of when he was discussing the mass media in "Manufacturing Consent," and the way advertisers, government, and capital all control and filter what content is disseminated to media consumers.

The message of modern, audiovisual, short-form, upvote-driven social media is bias and group compliance bereft of nuance. If you want to produce and consume novel ideas you are better served by media based on the written word.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39990133

rrnechmech
This is timeless
mg
The command line is still king.

Whenever I see new coders struggle, it usually is because they:

    - Don't know the context of what they are executing

    - Don't know about the concept of input and output
On the command line, the context is obvious. You are in the context. The working dir, the environment, everything is the same for you as it is for the thing you execute via ./mything.py.

Input and output are also obvious. Input is what you type, output is what you see. Using pipes to redirect it comes naturally.

Not being natively connected to context, input and output is often at the core of problems I see even senior programmers struggle with.

tokendem
[flagged]
booleandilemma
The capitalist system loves the CLI.

That complicated series of commands you just ran? Copy and paste them into the Jira ticket so the junior employee who makes half your salary can run them next time.

marmot777
Because I had to read this before falling asleep I had audio going out 2x so it sounds like a fifties cartoon.
pavlov
The CLI has a massive blind spot in today’s operating systems: it knows nothing useful about events.

Yet events are the primary way anything happens on a computer, whether it’s a user system or a server.

hgyjnbdet
Me: seems like my sort of thing.

Me: navigate to linked website, see wall of text.

Me: clicks reading mode

Me: *193 - 245 minutes*

Me: bookmark to read later; probably not